The development of sexuality in childhood in early learning settings: An exploration of early childhood educators' perceptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored Ontario early childhood educators' (ECEs) experiences and perceptions about the development of sexuality during early childhood. Sixty-four educators completed an online survey with a mix of closed- and open-ended questions; quantitative data were used to provide descriptive statistics and qualitative data were interpreted using thematic analysis. The findings underscore that ECEs observe children expressing typical sexual behaviours in early learning settings. These behaviours include self-touching, those occurring during bathroom routines and play-time, and behaviours influenced from family experiences. Varying perspectives about the purpose of sexuality education in early childhood emerged; ECEs suggested that knowledge of self, families, and being able to answer children's questions should be key areas on which to focus. Participants also discussed concerns regarding childhood sexual development. Primary concerns included parental involvement, questioning the appropriateness of sexuality education in early childhood, and the need for more professional development. Many factors affected ECEs willingness to address the development of sexuality in their practice. When asked about workplace policies that could provide guidance, one-third of ECEs did not know if a policy existed, and a further 54% stated their workplace had no policy. These findings contribute new data on ECE perceptions about preschool sexuality education in a Canadian context. The development of curriculum and policy are suggested as ways to provide systematic guidance and protocols regarding sexual and gender development. Additional training in the area of childhood sexual development is suggested to increase ECEs' knowledge and skills in guiding the development of sexuality in childhood.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".